Revealing article about the politics behind the last logo design! Good Read!

Thanks Mooch.... that is about as good as I can possibly imagine.

 

HOUSTON rockets*clap clap clap* HOUSTON rockets*clap clap clap* HOUSTON rockets*clap clap clap* HOUSTON rockets*clap clap clap* HOUSTON rocketsclap clap clap*

 

I'm a representative of the NBA, please remove the name Houston from your post as we don't want our teams to be associated with just one city. We are expanding on a global scale and attaching American city names to teams hurt our future interests. They are not the Houston Rockets, they are the Rockets of the NBA, owned by Mr. Les Alexander, and who happen to play in Houston at the moment.

 

hmm that old "new logo" and red uniform... so red orange and yellow/gold... ugh if the league hadn't stepped in?

 

I COMPLETELY understand his beef with the NBA. Frankly, I think the Rockets would understand his beef with the NBA. Sadly, teams often get the blame for bonehead moves that the league forced upon them because they own everything - the trademarks, the names, the logos, etc.

In fact, something burns me up more than anything else is the use of Rockets instead of Houston. This is particularly true now that the city is forking over a couple hundred million to build their arena.

Seems like putting Houston on the uni's would be the least they could do to show their support for the city that supported them when they needed it, but that's for another rant...

 

...I'll take it from here. Our favorite game is run by pure evil. The NBA owes Houston BIG TIME. I can't remember hearing anything more irritating than that in a long time.

Here are the teams that have the city name on their jerseys:
Cleveland (road)
Dallas (home and road)
Denver (road)
Detroit (road)
Indiana (home and road)
Memphis (home and road)
New Jersey (road)
New Orleans (home and road)
New York (home and road)
Orlando (road)
Phoenix (road)
Sacramento (road)
Seattle (road)
Toronto (road)

I would say that was a double standard. I wonder if the new jerseys will have "Houston" on them.

 

My point was not what are the Rockets views now, but what were they then. Why wasn't Hill asked:

"What were the Rockets doing during the time you were going back and forth with the NBA?"

Hill didn't seem to offer any insight into what kind of support he was getting from the origanization. They allowed Hill to speak on his views/dealing with the NBA, but the Rockets management team was strangely ommitted from any of his comments. It is very odd to me that he does not say one thing about the Rockets role in all of this, therefore, I think the article would be better if we could hear what he has to say about them.

 

The comment that I don't understand is that the "NBA is a merchandising business."

Not sure what that means.

I mean, if you want to sell more Jerseys and stuff, make the uniforms more sports oriented that actually look good. Making jerseys and logos that look childish or cartoonish might sell to the kids, but it creates a backlash from the fans that actually buy the tickets and merchandise.

It's backwards marketing.

The NBA view: Make jesesys that look flashy and cartoonish, and we'll sell more to the mass market (?).

The Sports fan view: Make jerseys that look sharp and sporty, and we'll by them.

Looks like the NBA views are in direct opposition to the fans.

P.S. I'm glad the Rockets are going back to the Red Unis. And I like the new logo, if done right. But I'm not sure about the stripes on the side of the uniform. I'll wait until I see them to make my decision.

 

Whoever said I wasn't here in 1995 -- you're right, and since Chris Hill's comments are mainly about the way he saw the process back then, I really don't have anything to say. It's his perspective, that's all. Talk to others who were around at the time, and they might have a very different take.

Incidentally, I don't know why they said I wasn't available for comment -- I never got a phone call from them. I get the feeling that if they had really made a big effort to get me on the phone, then they probably would've gotten my position in the organization right. It's in the media guide -- there's lots of good media people in town, and the ones I've had dealings with would've at least done that.

Tim

 

Have you seen kids on the corner wanting to wash cars to sponsor their team? Would you say they are sellouts for degrading the game by selling themselves and say that their team isn't as worthy as other teams? If you go to a stadium that you were playing in, would you want to see your teams jerseys flooding the stands? Have you seen highschool "dreamers" wearing their favorite players jersey and them liking how they look? Would you call them "victoms" of a merchandising machine called the Houston Rockets?

Most business men that own NBA teams, due so to make money. Most players play because they love basketball. Both of these groups can't exist without the other. That doesn't mean that the business men don't absolutely love the game of basketball and still work towards keeping corruption out of sports. That also doesn't mean players are immune to greed.

All I'm saying, is if you have to sell merchandise to support your team, make it simple, do it with pride, and make what you are selling mean something by playing hard and without the attitudes.

That goes right along with your comment about not following fads, although I don't think correcting that huge mistake of this past logo would be considered following any trend. Despite what they've tried in the past, it's more about how they represent themselves from now on and weither or not they stick with it.

 

Drew Gooden: "The best uniforms? Probably the Chicago Bulls, with the black pinstripes when MJ came up."

Ummmm, unless I'm misunderstanding, Gooden is wrong. The Bulls went to black with pinstripes in '96 I believe, but that was hardly when MJ was "coming up."

 

Why don't most players who play "because they love basketball", do so for significantly less money? It appears to me that Kevin Garnett loves to play the game, but he turned down 17 million prior to accepting 22 million a year.

I am not begrudging these athletes the opportunity to make as much as they can, but to say most play "because they love basketball" is a bit naive.

Most players want to make as much as possible to play the game they love. If they truly played mostly becuase of the love of the game, they would not be quibbling over one or two million a year.

 

He probably ment to say "came back."

 

atleast there will still be the Retro game right?

(anyone remember how good the rockets played last season in the red & yellow against the Magic? It wasn't coincidence...they played with a sense of pride from the past.)